Seòmar agus comataidhean

Good morning to our witnesses. The discussion so far has been really interesting. We have heard a lot about 1.5°C—that it is on life support, that it has a faint pulse, and so on. We know that good intentions are not enough to keep 1.5 alive.

I hope that Malini Mehra can still hear us. I was interested in developing what she said about the role of parliaments—particularly for us in the Scottish Parliament, because people want to see all of us in the Parliament roll up our sleeves and get on with the actions that need to happen. Does our panel have advice for members of the Parliament on what we need to do in the short term? If Malini cannot hear us, perhaps Professor Skea—

I would like to bring us back to the UK energy crisis. A report that Citizens Advice published last week found that consumers who are moved to a new supplier typically pay £30 a month more than before.

Jonathan Brearley said that all of Ofgem’s work is about supporting the consumer. How can Ofgem ensure that effective competition is promoted in the wholesale and retail markets while ensuring that energy is affordable to all consumers?

The issue is important. Citizens Advice goes on to say that many more people will face fuel poverty this winter and could face

“turning off their fridges and freezers, relying on hot water bottles for warmth and requesting support to buy extra duvets and blankets.”

None of us wants to live in such a society.

Energy companies and charities have called for the introduction of a social tariff—that is different from what Anna Rossington has talked about—for those who are already in fuel poverty, which would offer a tariff below the price cap. How could that be implemented to ensure that the most vulnerable households are protected from the recent price increases? More generally, given our interest in net zero, how can we be sure that the journey to net zero will not push households further into fuel poverty?

Good morning to the panel and to Professor Turner’s cat, who made a nice appearance a moment ago.

I return to your report, Professor Docherty, about which Mark Ruskell has asked questions already. You were modest about the attention that the report has received and some of the headlines that it prompted, but you are a former non-executive director of ScotRail and Transport Scotland, so you are a person of influence.

Your report is correct in saying that Scotland’s rail network has a central role to play in our meeting Scotland’s climate change targets, and you made an important point about making the shift from car to train. I am not sure, and the public is confused, about how the proposed service cuts, closures of ticket offices and job losses will help us to meet those climate change targets. Surely, those measures will make that objective more difficult—making people feel less safe and secure, and making train travel less accessible to them—and run counter to the race to net zero.

There are also concerns about the equality impact of some of those proposals. We are hearing a lot in the media now about women’s safety and about the rise in hate crime against disabled people and people of colour on our railways. If we want to change behaviours and give people the confidence to get on the trains, how will all those cuts help?

Thank you, Professor Docherty. I have found my notes from earlier, when I was scribbling down what you were saying in response to Mark Ruskell. You talked about having a plan for doubling the number of rail passengers. I am not sure whether that plan exists yet, but I am interested in what you think it should include.

Going back to public confidence and mood, during the pandemic, people were advised not to use public transport and, if they were travelling by car, not to car share. How do we use public messaging to shift that advice? I have not heard a lot of new advice telling people to get back on the bus and train. Morale is very low among key transport workers including rail workers, there is an industrial dispute and the number of strikes might increase during COP26. How do the Government, Transport Scotland, ScotRail and the trade unions cut through all that and find some agreement, so that we can get the travelling public back on to public transport and out of private cars?

The discussion so far has been fascinating. Indeed, I have had the privilege of taking part in some Zoom events with climate assembly members and I have met some of the children involved here in the Parliament.

I have so many questions to ask, but I suppose that I have to start somewhere. I was struck by Jocelyn Richard’s earlier comment that people want to do the right things and that we need to tackle climate change in a way that is fair to everyone. Can you give me a sense of some of the barriers that were discussed by the assembly? I know that the 100 or so people involved in the assembly came from different backgrounds but, aside from education and perhaps knowledge, what other barriers are people facing in making these behavioural changes? How concerned are people about the affordability of some of the proposals and the possible impact on people who are already experiencing, for example, fuel poverty, which has been mentioned?

Perhaps Jocelyn Richard can start. I am happy for others to answer, too.

Thank you, Jocelyn. I wonder whether Katie Reid has anything to add from the children’s perspective. I remember a previous chat that we had when I learned that some of the children who came to Parliament had never been on public transport before and that politicians are in danger of making assumptions about people’s living standards and knowledge. How do we ensure that everyone can play their part in tackling climate change and that issues such as poverty and lack of awareness are not holding young people back?

I was just briefly reflecting on how, when we met some young people at the Parliament, some of them said that that had been the first time they had been on a train, and I suggested that we often make assumptions about people’s living standards and backgrounds. How do we ensure that this activity is really inclusive and that all children can participate? We have talked about the importance of education, but what else can we do?

Good morning to the minister and his officials.

The policy is very welcome, but what is the Government’s response to the everyone aboard campaign, which is led by the Poverty Alliance and supported by 120 organisations and seeks to expand this scheme to everyone under 25 and people in receipt of benefits? Is that the direction of travel that the Government wants to go in? At what point will the scheme be reviewed after it comes into force next January?

We are all concerned about biodiversity loss. I have heard that organisations are concerned about the loss of expert biodiversity officers and staff from local government. Are you aware of that? Is the workforce available to advise local government on biodiversity declining? If not, what can be done to address that?